The Future

[Old Redeye]

As for speculation about where from here, look for a couple of options, but don't count on any of them.

1. 2-3 AB-412 Griffons as interim UH's pending deliver of 139's starting in early 2007. These could also be excess Canadian Griffons, the fastest option, and might include Griffon crew training in Canada - the best way to learn modern tactical helo ops, something the IAC has no experience in.
2. Orders for 2-4 more 139's once the program is well underway, or....
3. Hold at 4x 139's for the Special Forces CT role and general support, including VIP and casevac in Ireland and order 4x NH-90's for the deployable battlefield Support Helicopter role - probably with EU funding assistance.
4. Next up is an airlifter capable of supporting overseas deployments and integration with an eventual European Airlift Group = C-130J as optimum but rich at $US60M, or A400, upgraded used C-130 or 1-2 CASA C-295.
5. Trade-in of Lear and GIV for a new Challenger 604 for MATS
6. Reisbeck upgrade for the B200, possibly with Topdeck avionics identical to 235's/295/upgraded used Herc.
7. Upgrade of CN-235 MPA's or eplacement by C-295 Persuader MPA's if 295 selected as airlifter - again with more EU generosity.

You heard it here first folks!

[faughanballagh]

Wouldn't go for the C-130J, been having too many problems. Go for a dependable H2 or H3 model.

[The Blue Max]

This is true Aidan the Air Corp do not pocess any aircraft that are 'combat capable' in general western terms but on a national/domestic basis we have/will have a credible capability there in the PC-9M/EC-135/AB139 and the Casa Cn235 to have quite a decent internal defence/training and possible a overseas deployable force in the AB139's and with upgrade (if the IAC ever wanted) of all previous mentioned aircraft would give the IAC a great capability at a small price to upgrade if needed. The thread was not intended to compare a Light armed IAC PC-9M to a Belgium Air Component/Air Force F-16 (just for example) it was simpily designed to allow disscussion on what other armanents the IAC aircraft could carry and how it could benefit other key partners in the Defence Forces such as Army/Naval Service and improve the Irish Air Corp to an even higher standard not just the comparision of are general combat capability to the rest of europe. But thanks for the idea of the modern SRAAM and how they are begining to make old missile such as the AIM-9 out of date it is a good point.

[Bam Bam]

F/A - 18 Super hornets, thats what I want for christmas.

[Stinger]

ah yes the same old wishlist

[The Blue Max]

Nah all i want for chraitmas is'nt my two front teeth but about 10/12 EADS MAKO ALCA and I dont mind waiting a while for them to come on stream!!! Give us enough time to get to grips with PC-9M
full potential and then in time an aircraft that would meet are mission objectives perfectly.

[pym]

I'd settle for 6 Gripen 2 seaters

Send the Pilots out to Canada or the UK for fast jet/LIFT training, then to Sweden for Gripen conversion.

And before anyone moans about the number, Lithuania seems to be able to cope with 4 Luftwaffe F-4 Phantoms for its air defence..... granted they're on six-eight month rotation

Anyway yes... not going to happen, dont bother giving out

[The Blue Max]

Im really glad to see modern/resonable ideas being floated about again about what aircraft that Air Corp Pilots could hope to progress to after the PC-9M though it wont probaly be for another decade or so. I remeber noticing that in a recent issue of 'Flying In Ireland' with an interview with GOC of the Air Corp that there were serial numbers for a further two PC-9M what is the general consensis about the purpose of these future aircraft would these possible be attrition replacements or would they be just enhance the capabilty futher of the Flight Training School (FTS) or what exactly???

[Lordinajamjar]

It's quite clear that the new equipment requesitioned for the Irish DF over the last 4 years or so has helped put the Defence force into much better shape over land, sea and air. I understand that if new money is made available for aircraft that top of the list would be helicoptors and transport aircraft long before any jet fighters would be considered. I can understand that and I even buy into that thinking when the justification is the limited budget.

However if a future situation should ever arise where the IAC were seriously in the market for Jet fighters just how few would be considered adequate? Would just two be considered ridiculous or would that be enough to give basic cover to reach the heights and speed necessary to investigate air incursions or the like? The reality is that Ireland has no enemies real or imagined at this time. If two jets were deemed to be adequate wouldn't that give more weight to any argument to acquire the best available regardless of cost.

Just daydreaming but since you've opened up the subject. Just how many is enough?

[The Blue Max]

Cheers for the response to my question about the what the next step on from the PC-9M would most likly be, but does anybody know what exactly the story is regarding the possibility of a further two PC-9Ms mentioned recently in the interview with the GOC of the Air Corps??? I would say these would be additional improvement to the Flight Training School of the Air Corp College.

[Aidan]

Those two 'spare' numbers are for attrition replacements, to be filled as and when necessary. There has been no indication that they would be filled regardless of 'attrition', although it hasn't been ruled out either.

[GoneToTheCanner]

Hi all
Rather than buy more aircraft, just get more value out of what you've got. Improve serviceability/despatch rates and you'll have all the utility you want. Get away from the " it takes a week to do a 100-hr" mentality, adopt civilian-style maintenance practises, such as 24-hr maintenance and stores availability and strive to get near the 95%+ reliability of civil airlines. Tolerating a worse-than-40% serviceability rate is a joke and always has been....The Air Corps is falling down with manpower,just use it properly instead of allowing trained techies to slope off on squeezing bagpipes or farting about on canoeing courses. Set up a shift system for techies, with an intelligent payscale and bring the place, by force if you have to, into a genuine 24-hour set-up.Offer anyone who doesn't like it a redundo package or a sideways transfer off the ramp and get the wasters, dodgers and nixermen out. Make anyone who gets a Type course serve a minimum of two years on type. Get away from the military promotion system and promote the interested! That is, you won't get beyond Corporal if you don't study your aircraft or system. Get rid of the civvie inspectors;you don't need them and they are not under your direct control anyway.They're only doing what you should be doing already.....Send every NCO-ic to a civvie airline for six months, to see how it's done and demand the same level of expertise, oversight, skill,etc of them....Every NCO-ic should either rotate thru the school for six months or be assigned as a mentor for new apprentices. Every generation shouild bring on the next generation.
Rant mode to off!
regards
GttC

[DeV]

Send every NCO-ic to a civvie airline for six months, to see how it's done and demand the same level of expertise, oversight, skill,etc of them....

What makes you think they would come back?

[Bosco]

Hi all
Rather than buy more aircraft, just get more value out of what you've got. Improve serviceability/despatch rates and you'll have all the utility you want. Get away from the " it takes a week to do a 100-hr" mentality, adopt civilian-style maintenance practises, such as 24-hr maintenance and stores availability and strive to get near the 95%+ reliability of civil airlines. Tolerating a worse-than-40% serviceability rate is a joke and always has been....The Air Corps is falling down with manpower,just use it properly instead of allowing trained techies to slope off on squeezing bagpipes or farting about on canoeing courses. Set up a shift system for techies, with an intelligent payscale and bring the place, by force if you have to, into a genuine 24-hour set-up.Offer anyone who doesn't like it a redundo package or a sideways transfer off the ramp and get the wasters, dodgers and nixermen out. Make anyone who gets a Type course serve a minimum of two years on type. Get away from the military promotion system and promote the interested! That is, you won't get beyond Corporal if you don't study your aircraft or system. Get rid of the civvie inspectors;you don't need them and they are not under your direct control anyway.They're only doing what you should be doing already.....Send every NCO-ic to a civvie airline for six months, to see how it's done and demand the same level of expertise, oversight, skill,etc of them....Every NCO-ic should either rotate thru the school for six months or be assigned as a mentor for new apprentices. Every generation shouild bring on the next generation.
Rant mode to off!
regards
GttC

You forgot one make sure your work experience engineers don't mess about with things that they are not supposed to be messing about with.

[GoneToTheCanner]

Hi all
Good points there. To keep them, just remind them of their contract and make a no-poaching agreement with the airline. To stop them doing damage,they get attached to a crew and are mentored by the crew chief and their own intelligence and desire to stay employable. When they finish, they have to record their observations from their stay and bring positive lessons back to the Don. Sometimes,it pays to step outside one's job and view it from the outside,so to speak. It tends to put it into perspective,highlighting weaknesses and allows for a transfer of experience.
regards
GttC